Internships and the Architecture Profession Researchers: Abraham Murrell / James Brillon / Andrea Chiney / Jesse McCormick Client: Columbia University GSAPP Research, 2019 Internships and the Architecture Profession research funded Columbia University GSAPP's Unpaid LAbor Initiative According to the American Institute of Architects, interns are “students working at an architecture office while pursuing an architecture degree,” yet many early career positions are still referred to as “internships.” Most of those colloquially referred to as “interns” by the profession are actually defined by the AIA as emerging professionals on the path to licensure. Furthermore, the roles and responsibilities of the architectural intern are highly variable, and ambiguously defined by different institutions. This lack of clarity or consistent definition of the role of the intern, combined with the reinforcement of a culture of self-undervaluation, leaves room for potentially exploitative conditions, which can have an effect on the industry as a whole. The paper examines historical and contemporary documents issued by federal and state governments, professional associations, licensing boards and institutions since 1920 in search of the definition of an internship. Our analysis of these documents attempts to locate a consensus, as well as identify the inconsistencies and contradictions across these entities as they work to define the position of the architectural intern. The research finds several gaps in the understanding of what constitutes an internship versus an emerging professional position. Furthermore, it highlights the importance of better informing students, architectural offices, lawmakers and academe of the proper use of the term and its repercussions. Several existing professional organizations that oversee the architectural field are well poised to clarify these inconsistencies, and have already taken steps towards doing so. Other actors, such as architecture firms and schools, can also contribute to creating a more clearly defined path towards professional accreditation. State and federal regulations have little ability to enforce industry specific terminology to mitigate exploitive conditions. Focusing on a bottom-up, industry-specific approach promises better results, which will have an overall net benefit on the profession.